Jump to content


Members (No Report)
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Skarpen

  1. No it's not. Not even close. I edited my previous post, please check the addition.
  2. Doping is not medical treatment. It's a way to cheat. I don't really see any parallel here. But still anti doping regulations are codified both by internal country laws and internationally. It's not like some sport organization does it on it's own. As I stated before to BruceVC, you want to make this vaccines mandatory, please do. Legislation exists it's not like anyone would need to reinvent a wheel to do so. Until then no entity state or private should have any right to force anyone to take unmandatory medical treatment.
  3. My phone tricked me. Already asked the mod to move it where it should be.
  4. Drivers license is not a personal information. It's part of the job competency like education degree skills etc. This is something employer can verify as well as personal traits which I already mentioned. The truck company is only liable if they knowingly let intoxicated driver to drive. Otherwise only the driver is liable which is reasonable. But Europeans are far less frivolous with lawsuits then US. So maybe they just fighting with the problems they created. Here if an employer suspects a hired driver to be under the influence of some substance he can only call the police to check it as he have no right to check it himself. Which is reasonable as he is in no way competent to perform such a test. As stated before if a job requires any medical verification it is done by medical professionals as they are competent to perform such. And the employer only gets information there are no contraindications for the employee to work. Then again, it's all codified. What conditions should be taken into account for what type of work. For example truck driver will have some different set of medical examinations than welder. Still nothing specific is going to the employer as again, and I cannot stress this enough, employer have no business dwindling in employees personal sensitive information. This is a very fundamental principle for Europeans and East Europeans especially since we have been under Soviet occupation for decades where our life was substantially constantly invigilated and state owned. And I understand that Americans might not understand how it's important to us.
  5. As someone who actually met fascists and communists face to face I can safely say no. Not by a longshot. It would be too late then wouldn't it? Being worried is good. Keeps one vigil. Wouldn't be so sure. Would be nice if it wouldn't. But too many people are willing to surrender freedom for illusion of safety which is a slippery slope in that direction.
  6. No, I'm not Uighur. I'm mostly Slavic with some Lithuanian, Jewish and Kashub ancestry. But it's nice you didn't automatically made assumptions and asked
  7. So you support government telling companies what to do in areas that actually affects the business but refuse government involvement when businesses stick their nose in areas they have no business interfering like employees private life and health? That's quite a weird position. Why would anyone support some schmuck right to dictate persons life just because he can afford to set a grocery store and hire someone is beyond me. And I don't flip flop on EU. EU is such a vast organization that it's impossible for all it's decisions to be bad or all good. So I rather criticize the bad and praise the good. I know nowadays it's shun upon such stance and people rather deal in absolutes "this is all good", "this is all bad" but I think my approach is more reasonable. It's not like there wouldn't be some state regulations protecting personal freedom if the EU wouldn't have such laws. So it doesn't matter to me if it's from EU or local state. Sure the free market and support entrepreneurs is ok. But I don't see how my personal health information is any part of business of the steel industry company I work for. Business can make business decisions all they want but they have no right to make decisions about my personal life, duh. I lived under government tyranny and I'm not to eager to surrender to a corporate tyranny. I agree it's a balancing act but I'm more in favor of balancing it around personal freedom rather than which master have more power government or corporate. I'd rather have no masters.
  8. What about it? Wow. So much for the land of the free, I guess. Are those at least codified somewhere or employers just do it willy nily? In Poland employers cannot even make breathalyser test on employee. They have to call the police if they suspect a person is intoxicated, to check. There are some professions that require health certifications but the checking is made by health care providers, not the companies themselves and no medical records are ever held by some company. All they get is a plain "no contraindications for working" so if you have a condition that is not affecting the occupation employer will never know and if you do employer will never know what exactly that would be. As stated above persons medical records are considered sensitive private information in Europe. Aren't you a supporter of minimum wage and fair working conditions? You don't seem to mind state control of companies in that area. It's kinda funny you guys consider for example Trump as despicable human being but are willing to give him your sensitive personal health information if he happens to be your boss. Wierd.
  9. I always supported the girls right to wear shortest skirts, midriff tops and whatever they felt like wearing when I was in school
  10. OK, then why only covid? There are literally dozens of viruses, diseases, bacteria, funghi etc. you can bring to a workplace. Should your employer just be given your whole medical history? How about mental state? This can also bring damage to workplace if you have problems. Should your doctors just email everything to Katie from HR? How much of your personal life are you willing to give up to random people in the name of safety?
  11. I know that. But someone at some point used the term Muslim ban and you know how nitpicky Gromnir is.
  12. It seems for Gromnir the banning of whole religious group is so fundamentally against the principality of what USA is as a country that no amount of argumentation or rationalization that you could provide would change his stance on the matter even by inch. You cannot argue with someone's fundamental principles.
  13. Looking forward to him running again. Look, if it's about Jerry from another department then yes it doesn't matter what he thinks of me. But get enough Jerries and it will matter. Did it matter what whites thought about blacks in SA during Apartheid? Or what Nazis were thinking about Jews in the 1940s? China and especially NK? You consider them to be one and the same? Anyway, no I don't. I had the opportunity to meet many Chinese students and they are a decent folks. And my close friend worked for 5 years in China. So on the matter of NK and China I'm not fond of their governments not the people as such. Why would smartest people reduce the cost if they find the cost to quality ratio to be acceptable? It may be cheaper to live in Shanghai but are the standards the same? Kudos to US athletes.
  14. Yes, exactly. It is about health and personal medical information is protected by The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Data Protection Law Enforcement Directive and other rules concerning the protection of personal data. You know the EU laws and regulations you are so supportive of. And no entity can check, gather or require any medical information be it a store cashier or my employer. Therefore companies banning people on the basis of having a medical procedure or not will not fly in EU.
  15. Answer me this simple question. Would it be OK for companies to say: "Prove to us you are 100% white or you are not fit to work in our company" "Prove to us you are not a Muslim or you are not fit to work in our company" "Prove to us you will not get pregnant or you are not fit to work in our company" I don't know about you but I don't think any of those should be legal and companies should discriminate on basis other than job qualification and personal traits. In fact at least in Poland it's illegal for companies to do so. Definitely no one should be banned from work for not having an unmandatory medical procedure of any kind. Employer is not the owner of the employees.
  16. Compliant with what exactly? You must understand that right now the covid vaccines are not mandatory by any law anywhere. Yet constantly there is a talk how to punish or force people to take vaccine. Where do you see law and order in this equation? You cannot punish people for not doing something that is not mandatory in any way.
  17. You need to understand BruceVC that for some people Trump have to be the antichrist and his supporters all need to be bloodthirsty demons. They cannot be humanized or understand in any capacity beyond that they are all inherently evil from the day they were spawned in this world. Otherwise worldviews would crumble and some people would need to look in mirrors and see their own reflections and that's something they don't like to do. So don't get your hopes up on actually discuss the Trump and Trump supporters unless you want to be labeled as dissident
  18. Why not whack them like you want to do to all unvaccinated?
  19. It's funny that this also works in reverse.
  20. So, I provide a couple of examples how different methods give different results and you still beat the same drum. so I didn't have to divine anything just read your posts for the last couple of months...
  21. You have some serious problems, you know. I just wrote to you: so I didn't have to divine anything just read your posts for the last couple of months... ~30% Searched for 'Sharp_one, sharpie, sharp' in All Content (obsidian.net) ~50% Searched for 'sharpie' in All Content (obsidian.net) ~75% Searched for 'Sharp_one' in All Content (obsidian.net) BTW: You clearly are not obsessed
  22. You are projecting. Yet again I might add. What I actually wrote was: "the search only returns mostly you referring to this guy" Now you assumed: 1. I was using the forum search, which I might do or not. Google has better algorithms for searching forums content for example or I might have referred to a memory search. 2. I used only the phrase "Sharp_one" and not any variations. Which skyrockets your 2% you came up with. 3. I didn't narrow the results in any way, which for example a time frame of a 6 months would skyrocket your 2% to almost 100% at the time of my search. So maybe take advice from yourself and stop assuming you know better what others did, do, would do, will do, think and meant.
  23. Norway have a slang for some obscure forum nick? Weird. Mine comes from: https://mapcarta.com/17701808 Which is in Sweden and Sweden is not Norway. I think I have to clarify to not be accused of not reading links I post Google also found some landmarks bearing the name in Norway, but search for skarpen slang meaning didn't return anything. Sorry for triggering you. You are the only poster who regularly reference the guy since I got here and you don't always use his full nick so you might search for variations of the spelling. Regardless, it's clear even from your calculating the number of results that the obsession is strong. Seek help and I will try not to trigger you in the future.
  • Create New...